Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Death-Row Rule Sours Caribbean on Britain

This is a place so enamored of British values and institutions that people on other Caribbean islands refer to it as ''Little England.'' Yet a Government-appointed Constitutional Revision Commission here is considering whether to discard Queen Elizabeth II as head of state, declare Barbados a republic and eliminate formal ties to the British legal system.

All across the English-speaking Caribbean, from Jamaica to Grenada, similar proposals are being advanced. Complaints vary from island to island, but one issue remains constant: popular dissatisfaction with the Privy Council, the British high court whose members are appointed by the Queen and which nearly all the British colonies in the Caribbean retained as their supreme tribunal after they became independent.

In 1993, the Privy Council ruled that prisoners convicted of capital crimes and not executed within five years have suffered ''inhuman or degrading punishment'' and should have their death sentences commuted.

But ever since, the number of criminals on death row in the Commonwealth Caribbean has been growing, as has the number of death sentences that have had to be commuted and the ire of a population that is frightened by rising crime rates and believes strongly in an old-fashioned approach to law and order.

''They are idiots over there in London for coming up with such foolishness,'' Hatherly Cumberbatch, a construction foreman here, said of the ruling. ''If you murder a man willfully and wantonly, you should be hanged for it, as Scripture mandates. We must have justice, and if the only way to get it is to let go of Queen Elizabeth and the Privy Council, then so let it be.''

In some countries, local governments, responding to public pressure, have begun speeding up appeals procedures to beat the five-year deadline. But that approach disturbs international human rights organizations and many lawyers in a region that regards the rule of law as one of the most cherished legacies of three centuries of British colonial administration.

''The whole situation is of huge concern and very alarming, and not just because we oppose the death penalty in all cases,'' Piers Bannister, a researcher for Amnesty International who monitors the Caribbean, said in a telephone interview from London. ''The mere fact they are speeding up cases means you must ask whether these people are having adequate appeals to check that their convictions were constitutional.''

The answer, Mr. Bannister argued, would seem to be no. ''We're seeing the English-speaking Caribbean learning from the United States,'' he continued. ''It seems like a rush to execute, rather than placing a priority on applying the death penalty in an appropriate and judicial manner.''

Like Australia and Canada, most of the dozen English-speaking nations of the Caribbean are constitutional monarchies, in which an appointed Governor General represents the British Crown. As independent members of the Commonwealth, they have their own elected governments, foreign policies and armies or police but retain certain trade preferences and institutional links from colonial times.

The 1993 edict did not formally outlaw capital punishment, and nine men were hanged in five Caribbean countries between 1994 and 1996. But by establishing the five-year ceiling, seen as unrealistic in a region of small states with limited budgets and creaky bureaucracies, the Privy Council created a loophole that promotes abuse and encourages manipulation, critics of the ruling say.

''Defense lawyers are using all of their skills to drag out the appeal process'' in order to gain eligibility for commutation for their clients, said Dr. Kenneth John, a prominent lawyer in St. Vincent and the Grenadines. ''They have been exploiting to the hilt all of the opportunities to get it past five years, and that is what has annoyed society as a whole.''

The Caribbean has experienced a startling rise in crime in recent years, much of it in the form of robberies, burglaries and slayings related to drug use or trafficking. In Jamaica, for instance, more than 920 people were killed last year -- a figure only slightly less than that of New York City, whose population is nearly three times as large.

''Given the high levels of violence and crime in the Caribbean, you can understand it,'' Mr. Bannister said of popular opposition to the Privy Council ruling. ''Amnesty International is extremely sympathetic to the situation of countries like Jamaica, where the murder rate is at an all-time high. But we believe that capital punishment distracts from the real issue, which is the appalling level of violence in that society.''

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

In Jamaica, more than 60 convicted felons are now on death row, according to statistics compiled by the group, and complaints about the cost of housing them are growing. In the Bahamas, whose population is 260,000, there are 36 people waiting to hang, the group calculates, while in Guyana, which has already abandoned the Privy Council but continues to use British law as precedent, the figure is at least 16 among a population of slightly less than 900,000.

But the Caribbean country with the largest number of prisoners facing death sentences is Trinidad and Tobago, with a population of 1.25 million, where, according to Amnesty International, more than 116 people are on death row. Those condemned include a prominent drug dealer and his gunmen, who killed a man who owed them money, and, in order to leave no witnesses, executed the rest of his household.

''If there ever was a case where you can justify the death penalty, it is this one,'' said a diplomat in Port-of-Spain. ''If the Privy Council ruling lets them off, there is going to be hell to pay.'' Here in Barbados, abolishing the link to the Privy Council has been one of the most popular of the ideas presented to a constitutional review commission in public hearings that began late last year. This country has already restored the use of the cat-o'-nine-tails to punish criminals and widened grounds for corporal punishment in schools, so the proposal strikes most people as reasonable and long overdue.

''Capital punishment is always emotional, and there is no doubt of the strong feelings on the issue here,'' said Henry Forde, a member of Parliament and lawyer who is head of the commission, which is scheduled to deliver its recommendations to Prime Minister Owen Arthur by October. But he said doing away with the Privy Council also appeals to nationalistic sentiment. ''You can't linger at the steps of the Colonial Office in London forever,'' Mr. Forde said. ''I don't know why we continue to go somewhere else, cap in hand, for our ultimate justice.''

When the English-speaking countries of the Caribbean started becoming independent in the 1960's, ''it suited the islands, scattered as they were, that they could have one court, instead of many, serving separate jurisdictions,'' said Sir Probyn Inniss, a distinguished jurist from St. Kitts and Nevis. ''Because of tradition and the commonwealth countries paradigm, it was the logical thing to do.''

In addition, Sir Probyn said, it was important ''to the people of the Caribbean to have a final court of appeal perceived as being untainted by any partisan political considerations.'' And over the years, the Privy Council has taken a stance that is largely ''more in favor of greater personal freedoms, a wider measure of constitutional rights, and more and more safeguards for the individual citizen,'' he said.

But the generation now coming to maturity throughout the Caribbean has no memory of the colonial era, and so puts less value on maintaining traditions and institutions inherited from Britain. In many countries, the Queen and the Privy Council that she appoints are viewed as remote, irrelevant and easily replaceable.

''The Privy Council has no idea what is going on in our societies, and so it should not be making decisions on West Indies cases,'' said Lysanne Simmons, a 22-year-old law student at the University of the West Indies here. ''We should have our own court of last instance, because we are the only ones who know what is going on.''

At the time of independence, ''we needed guidance, but we have experience now, and can stand on our own feet and make our own decisions,'' Ms. Simmons said. ''The old generation came up singing 'God Save the Queen,' but to us, she's just a figurehead, and we don't need those ties.''

In place of the Privy Council, its critics want all 12 English-speaking Caribbean nations to form a regional Supreme Court, drawing on West Indian precedents and appointing West Indian judges. That would require a referendum or constitutional amendment in several countries, but political leaders across the region appear sympathetic to the plan.

While ''it is very unfortunate that this issue has become linked to capital punishment,'' said Kenny B. Anthony, a former chief counsel of the Caribbean Community who in May was elected Prime Minister of St. Lucia, ''I don't think our sovereignty can be complete until we replace the Privy Council.''

We are continually improving the quality of our text archives. Please send feedback, error reports,
and suggestions to archive_feedback@nytimes.com.

A version of this article appears in print on July 7, 1997, on Page A00001 of the National edition with the headline: Death-Row Rule Sours Caribbean on Britain. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe